[rzz3]

> I don’t understand why small changes that can be done in kindness are seen as so inconvenient as to be worth this level of rejection.

I think one key disconnect is that some people form complete sentences in their head before they speak, and have an opportunity to effectively “edit them”, as if you would read and edit an email before sending. Others, like myself, communicate a thought directly from mouth to brain. I try my best to change patterns and think about my words in professional settings, but, every additional thing I must avoid saying is effectively another branching point in the filter function for my speech. Each individual thing may not be a big inconvenience, but cumulatively, it becomes quite an inconvenience. In the last few years, I feel a constant pressure and anxiety about the words that I say. I have no bad intention and really truly don’t want to make anyone feel bad, but no one cares about my intention... once I say the wrong thing it’s done and I’m judged by others for it. This is the first time I ever heard of “fell on deaf ears” being offensive, and I can definitely understand why, and I’d never want to make you feel bad by saying it, but it’s yet another common phrase to add to my list of filters. I’m now thinking of all of the people who I may have offended by saying it.

I feel like context is everything. If I said that in context of a deaf person not hearing something I said, that would be offensive and hurtful and rude. If I said it in the context of an objection I raised being ignored, it should be understood that I’m not literally referring to deaf people. If I said something was “the straw that broke the camel’s back”, everyone knows I’m not literally putting straws on a camel.

[zaksoup]

I really appreciate your thoughtful take here. One thing I think is important to note is that I don't want, and I don't think any hearing impaired person would want (though I can't speak for all of them) for you to spend really any time feeling guilty about a potential offense you might have caused.

What I'm advocating for is radical compassion and empathy. When you hear somebody say "this thing can hurt me" worry less about all the times you were involved in that, and consider more how you can help folks avoid that harm in the future.

That's not to say we should ever introspect. I noticed that with a friend of mine who recently came out as trans I was still often using gendered language "dude, man, etc" from before they came out, even if I usually got their pronouns right. They didn't ask me, but the introspection I was doing prompted me to offer them an apology and commit to doing better about those kinds of things. That has brought us closer and given me a better perspective for being a good friend and ally to them.

I don't think anybody thinks you're trying to be a jerk, or intentionally seeking to hurt people's feelings. What I'm reacting to is a vocal minority of folks, often in tech, who seem to react to being told "Hey, this thing sometimes hurts my feelings when I notice it" with "How dare you accuse me of being literally Darth Vader. This is THOUGHT POLICING."

Just... try your best to be kind to people. If that means you're the CEO of github and you can change "master" to "main" why the heck wouldn't you?

[rzz3]

Thanks, I appreciate your perspective and I agree with a lot of it. I absolutely try to be kind to people. There is though, unfortunately, a vocal minority of people who really exact judgement when the wrong words are used, and they’re usually not even part of the group whom would feel hurt by hearing such words. I’m sure they have good intentions also, but I really do think there is too much “word policing” going on. It’s very hard to unlearn every common word or phrase that someone may find offensive, and the feeling is somewhat similar to having a piece of duct tape over your mouth for someone like me. I find myself over analyzing my words and saying “uhhh” a lot trying to make sure the things I say don’t contain any bad words/phrases. As a software engineer, I tend(ed) to use “blacklist/whitelist” a lot, and the new replacement words of “allowlist/denylist” still feel awkward and don’t fit every situation. I’m trying my best to slowly come around and try to adopt all of the new phrases, but it’s a lot more work than the “think before you speak” communicators realize.

I think a better strategy would be to just lead by example and use the phrasing you think is appropriate, as others will likely naturally adopt it as we do with other group context phrases. After all, I learned words like “blacklist” from reading code and technical books and running CLI programs. I just think we should be patient with people, assume good intentions, and never shame people for using the wrong words with the best of intentions.

>If that means you’re the CEO of GitHub and you change “master” to “main” why the heck wouldn’t you?

Because it doesn’t really do anything to solve the underlying issues, and I question the intention behind it. I’d rather see GitHub work to make their teams more diverse, provide assistance to open source projects created by people of color and women, improve access to technical education, etc. than to make a change like this and act like “okay I did it guys, I fixed racism” (I realize that’s disingenuous). It also has a nonzero cost to GitHub and its users, for arguably not much benefit.